Site menu:

So I have a feeling that I may be settling into a couple-a-somewhat-meaningful-posts-a-week routine here at the old blogyard, not nearly as much as I have posted in the past. It’s not that I’m not writing, I’m just writing in other spaces, trying to comment more to the things I’m reading, writing articles and proposals, and starting and participating discussions in PLP communities. (In fact, Sheryl and I are hoping to start a new blog just about that effort in the near future.) Or it might just be that I’m just really wrapped up in the politics of the moment which I choose not to write about here. Or it might be that I still can’t seem to shake this stuckness I still feel with the conversation about social tools and learning in schools. Or…who knows what else it might be. It’s kind of hard to let this space drift a bit since I’ve been focused here for so long. But drift it might.

Technology, of course, is key, and I want to dwell on only two aspects of how technology can now transform our learningscape: immersion and intelligent tutoring systems. Immersion is a concept that has received all too little attention in the learning literature. Consider, for example, how every one of us has learned the immensely complex system that is our own native language. We learn language through immersion and desire. Immersion comes from being surrounded by others talking and interacting with us and is furthered [sic] facilitated by our deep desire to interact, be understood and express our needs. We learn language fearlessly and constantly. Nearly everyone with whom we interact is a teacher for usâ€”albeit an informal teacher, encouraging us to say new things, correcting us, extending our vocabulary, and so on. This simple form of immersion is fundamentally social in nature. In todayâ€™s high tech, graphically rich world we now have almost limitless opportunities to leverage immersion. We can now build simulation models of cites, historic events, atomic structures, biological and mechanical systems to name just a few. Our challenge becomes how to share the vast simulations and data bases that already exist and share them in a way that others can extend, remix and compose them in order to expand their reach and scope. I still dream of a virtual human system where I can explore any aspect of how our bodies function from organs to cells to membranes. There are promising signs, but as of yet we have no real framework for constructing and sharing modules of such a system. But if we can entertain the semantic web, perhaps we could entertain a vast and recursively interconnected web of simulations. No one group can build it all, but many could contribute, including students themselves.

In that context, I can’t help to think of watching Tucker learn Spore, which he loves, btw. Last night, I watched him as his creature mixed it up with another tribe, ultimately getting himself killed in the process. I tried to really focus on the decisions that he was making, to fight, to run, all the while feeling, literally, the intensity coming off of his skin. When the battle was finally over, he went back and starting re-creating his creature, assessing the traits that he needed more of, the things he could get rid of. And then, he was off to try it again.

Like I’ve said, I’m not a gamer, but I’ve been struck by how much Spore hooks you in. The graphics, the objective, the decisions; you are immersed in this world and in the process. And you are pretty much in there on your own to figure it out. You literally learn your way through the game, and while that may not be an insight for those who have been there, done that, it is a revelation for me. What I would like, however, is a Yoda. Someone to work through this stuff with, to counsel me, ask the right questions, nudge in the right direction, but let me learn it on my own. Tucker, however, is perfectly fine without that. In fact, I think he prefers the challenge of doing it on his own. Me, I can feel my frustration. My son, who is easily frustrated in many other areas of his learning life, goes with the flow.

That concept of immersion also has me thinking about my PLP work with Sheryl. One of the reasons we went down this path of long term, six to eight month professional development is because we didn’t see (and still don’t see) much movement or deep learning coming out of the one-day (or one-hour) workshops we were doing. Sheryl’s brilliance in her work in Alabama was not only that to really help people and specifically educators understand the potentials of online social learning environments, they had to be immersed in those spaces, not just dropped off for the day, but that they also needed to feel a sense of community in the process. We all know, this isn’t about tools, it’s about the connections and the relationships.Â And while this is common sense, this idea that the best way to learn French is to go live in France for a few months, it’s not easy to make work in these contexts. Even though Tucker may not mind being dropped into Spore and figuring it out on his own, most of us need that situated community support to start learning the new language or tools or pedagogies. We need the immersion into the conversation. We need Yodas.

That’s why that Seely Brown quote jumps out, especially the “Immersion comes from being surrounded by others talking and interacting with us and is further facilitated by our deep desire to interact, be understood and express our needs” part. Not saying we can’t do that without technology, but I wonder how we can do that more effectively with it.

27 Comments

Needing a Yoda is a damn good point. I think that is what is too often missing in the discussions over education/ technology/media literacy. What do I mean?

I mean we assume that just because children can use the technology that they know how to use it effectively and to support their learning. As you suggest, we still have a long way to go to move the technology away from entertainment and into immersion learning – but it has the capacity – and we need to find the best ways to support children and young people to use this tool to the best of their ability. In the same way we teach them to read and support them to select what books to read.\

I really like this post. I think it is important for people to always have a hunger for learning. We are surrounded by things everyday that makes us learn, change a point of view and I think kids respond to this much faster than we do!

I found a similarity to your post with a chapter in our class what we read in Media, Learning and Sites of Possibility. The writer, named Leif Gustavson talks about teachers (and adults for that matter) being ethnographers. He discusses being willing and open to learning about what makes students tick. How they function in a realm that is theirs. I think this echos your story about Tucker. Kids are so open to learning, being immersed in the unknown especially with technology!

There are many connections between Will’s blog and the Gustavson chapter we had to read for class. The main goal it seems from both is creating an atmosphere where we are the ‘Yoda’ of our students lives by bringing into the classroom what is important to their lives. I think that if all teachers can do this then we can watch as our students blossom and grow. Yes there will be frustrations, but if a student can learn through those they only get stronger.

I think the most important lesson that was in both reading and this blog is to remember that as teachers we are learners too. Our students will have so much to teach us in life, we just need to play close enough attention to hear what they have to say.

This article really strikes home with this younger generation of pre-service teachers (of which I am included). You are right when you say that “technology is the key.” Unfortunately the problem is people are still trying to figure out what door it is unlocking. We as students trying to become teachers want to break into this new form of expression to get kids interested in what they are doing.

Why is it that a kid will not write a paragraph in school, but will go home and write 2 1/2 pages on his blog about a new album or book that he is interested in. There is definitely this sense of immersion that these kids have in their technology. This is facilitated by this LARGE community of other kids who are doing the same thing and sharing all of their ideas.

This reminds of of an chapter I read in Gustavson’s book “Media sites…” about Gil the turntablist that is completely immersed in his work. We need to be able to take that drive he has for his craft and gear it towards enriching his education. We need to find what these kids are immersed in and apply it to other parts of their lives.

Will, I agree in total w/all of your thoughts here. There’s a significant relationship b/w your discussion and a chapter in the ’08 Peter Lang pub. Media, Learning and Sites of Possibility. I recommend it to you.

In ch. 4 Leif Gustavson shares an ethnographic study he’s done of a student in an urban setting who spends hours working on his project, turntablism.

Gustavson explores Gil’s immersion in learning he chooses to do and maps its sophistication and its social networking potential for GIl to continue to work with and learn from, as well as teach, others what he knows.

One of my favorite quotations from the chapter is here: “Too often in classrooms, work is assigned and the last thing the teacher would ever consider doing is the work that her or his students are doing. School districts, schools and teachers package learning in such a way that teachers would never want to do the work. It is boring, childish, contrived and meaningless.”

Gil, the subject of Gustavson’s own learning throughout the progress of his collecting data for the ethnography has chosen his own “work.” He’s never bored with it. Isn’t that amazing! As teachers we fail to see that kids have their own work, Tucker’s investment in SPORE, e.g., and it is our job to help them name, nurture, attend to and value that work–or in your son’s case, to get the heck out of the way.

I think the piece on immersion best justifies why teachers should use technology in the classroom. While some of our students are downloading music to their ipods and shooting video of stunts and uploading them to youtube.com, still others do not have this kind of access in their homes. How wonderful, then, would it be to expose these children to what their peers know and have mastered? Reaching out in this way might be the ‘in’ a student needs to get hooked on learning and school. That’s why we teachers need to first teach ourselves how to use these new technologies, whether it be podcasts or blogs, to bring into our classroom with some level of expertise and allow our students to discover this new media, just as we did. In Gustavson’s chapter, he talks about bringing the students’ “out-of-school” work into the classrooms. Using a podcast or blog or a wiki is new and exciting for students and will create a desire for them to learn. I think when teachers take the time to incorporate technology – certainly soething that our students do outside of school – we are allowing learning to be fun!

There are so many things that we learn in school that are taught in specific formats for specific reasons. Different things come more easily or difficult to students. I think that this has to do with the differences in the ways that people learn, but I also think that it has a lot to do with how it is taught.

Kids now have a much easier time on the internet than we do, they go out and discover different things that interest them, and figure out the new technologies before many of us even know about them. I think that this is because they are immersed in a world of technology, and it is their world. For us as future teachers, we need to stop seeing it as a part of our world and theirs, but that [almost] everything in our students lives revolves around technology of some sort or another.

Therefore, when we are teaching our students, we cannot separate technology from the learning, or we will not be successful. I strongly believe that because this is their world, they will be more willing, and ready to learn with it than we could imagine. I also think that it is important that we learn together. We can all learn a thing or two from our students, and showing them that we are working together to gain knowledge is empowering for the students. I also think however, that we need to have an amount of prior knowledge about the technologies, so that it can be more of a guided learning, or guided discovery experience than it would be if we went into it blind. In other words, we all need to do our homework.

Where unfortunately we haven’t gotten to Yoda yet, we have each other to learn from and with. Learning is best when it is collaborative, and when we immerse our students in it rather than just merely teach it.

If immersion is the key to effective learning, it seems appropriate to desire a guide (like Yoda) to help us navigate our newest venture in educating ourselves. I agree with you, that immersion and desire are two of the most important aspects if we, or our students, are interested in learning. The comparison to learning a language is helpful, because technology (gaming, blogging, tweeting etc.) really can be a foreign language to some of us. In fact, may of our students are, most likely, more proficient in this language than ourselves. The problem is not that our students aren’t familiar with navigating the web, or comfortable using networking tools in the social sense. The real questions is: “how do we get them to connect these skills to learning in the classroom?” You’re absolutely right when you say that it’s not about the tools, but the student’s connections and relationships to the pedagogy. The concept of “simulation” is really at the heart of immersion, isn’t it? What better way to learn than by a virtual hands-on experience? The idea of taking a simulated tour through the human body sounds exciting to me, and I am not even all that interested in biology! But, that’s the idea, creating this “interconnected web” could engage students in ways they might never had been exposed to before and hopefully, after giving it a go ourselves, we could be their Yoda.

I’m a some time gamer (but I tend not to tell people that.) Not that there’s anything wrong with it, just isn’t a defining part of my self construction at this point. SO, anyway-

I’m interested in this desire for a Yoda idea. When I’ve spent time learning to role play Link or Laura Croft, or whomever, I’ve always happily done so at my own rate. It’s a slow, methodical process to learn what makes sense in a constructed reality, a reality that doesn’t coexist easily with my own observations about the universe. Throughout time I’ve met fellow gamers who run out and purchase the step-by-step instructions to games like ZELDA or TOMB RAIDER so that they are able to complete each task efficiently, and so they achieve optimal success. That’s one way to do it. Personally, I find that boring. It’s an exercise in hand-eye coordination and nothing more. There’s no ingenuity. There’s none of that lovely frustration that forces new tactics, and creative problem solving. One of the best rewards to this kind of work is that eventually a kind of self-referencing logic begins to form. A new, time and program-specific logic- a video game logic- gamers might recognize what I’m talking about.

In the same way, a student may be immersed in a topic and learning, and may get somewhere a lot quicker, with a lot more efficiency, with some kind of guide to aid them along the way. I’m kind of a radical pre-service teacher though (and by that I mean super cool, not out-side of the norms, LOL) and I believe that existentialist learning makes sense. Teacher guidance should be minimal. Trouble is: we’ve already set these high-school students up for failure in that kind of learning sphere. Our early education programs need to promote more independent learning.

The introduction by John Seely Brown,which is on Will’s blog post on “immersive learning,” summarizes the thoughts and purpose of the article “Influencing Pedagogy Through the Creative Practices of Youth,” by Leif Gustavson. Creative thinking, critical thinking, expression through the arts and sciences, and interactive projects. All of the aforementioned activities become more possible and realistic when technology intervenes. Once technology (i.e. computers and the internet) is involved, a new world of exploration and learning opens up. As the student creates his/her project or peruses through a new website or software, the student learns how to navigate unfamiliar territory independently. Reading comprehension, abstract thinking, and creative thought all come to fruition when logging onto a new website, program, or game. Can you think of a better way to access multiple forms of thinking and working from one person’s seat than through technology? I can’t!

Will Richardson constantly gives us pre-service teachers something rich to chew. Richardson shares with us from â€œOpening Up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education thro…
I’m glad he chose this excerpt to share because it touches upon something that is often lost in the battle to teach students everything that they need to know. What ever happened to natural learning from the world around us?
Here’s a quote from the
“Nearly everyone with whom we interact is a teacher for usâ€”albeit an informal teacher, encouraging us to say new things, correcting us, extending our vocabulary, and so on. This simple form of immersion is fundamentally social in nature.” – John Seely Brown

Richardson reminds us of the difference between learning and schooling. While learning is a process that we may enjoy for our whole lives, schooling is the possibly grueling formal process of gaining information, which will be essential for standardized tests and little else.

I am excited by Richardson’s reminder of the concept of informal learning. It makes me think of the informal history we learn from our grandparents, the economics we learn from our parents, and the sociology we learn from our friends. We learn English from avid readers who tell us about the next “must read” for our list, we learn geography and culture from traveling with friends and family, we learn science from questioning our surroundings. This is authentic discovery and learning. We need more of this in our schools.

Will Richardson’s blog post, ‘Immersive Learning’ and Gustavson’s chapter in ‘Media, Learning, and Sites of Possibility’ deal with the idea of learning through doing. As Gustavson quotes, Jean Lave calls these situations ‘ownable dilemmas.’ (p. 105) Will’s son Tucker is like Gil because they are both placed in “perplexing, confusing, or challenging moments where he (they) must do more work to move forward.” That is some of what Richardson is discussing when he talks about Tucker being fine with figuring out ‘Spore’ by himself with no assistance. He has to learn his way through that game, being totally immersed in it and so does Gil in his artistic pursuit. Richardson speaks of his desire for a ‘Yoda’ to help guide him through online social environments and a community to help immerse him to learn these new environments and this is what a classroom can provide. As Gustavson says, “Instead, teachers design learning environments that encourage a way of being in the classroom.” Teachers can be the Yodas that can help immerse students in these experiences where they learn through doing rather that through strict methods of teaching.

Gary,
Thanks for your interest in our class! I just wanted let you know about our interest in Richardson.
You ask if we are writing as an assignment. “Assignment” is such a limiting word. It implies “requirement.” As graduate students, we are all developing our personal intellectual projects. Some of us wrote to Richardson during our class time, but we have all been following him independently as well, and some of us have already written about his posts in our own blogs. If you are interested, I invite you to check out our work and our thoughts on education (much of which is posted online at a ning site)

So, yes, to answer your question, we were invited to respond to RIchardson during class. I can’t speak for my whole class, but I feel as though I am rarely required to do anything as an “assignment.” We are typically invited to partake in some form of cognitive development. Our interest in Richardson stretches beyond a class assignment.

Your blog post on ‘immersive learning’ is very closely related to Gustavson’s case study (Media, Learning, and Sites of Possibility) of Gil, a young turntablist, in that both comment on how education and identity formation is a continuous process, a process that is informed by close interactions with the social scene surrounding us. I see many similarities between Gil and Tucker and can relate to the idea that much of what we learn–about others and ourselves–is accomplished through trial and error, by putting ourselves out there and seeing what happens. From my own experiences as a student, I remember the stifling feeling of not having access to the social world constantly under development. The tasks and competition were important, and there was very little freedom in bringing my own personal interests into the classroom.

There are other types of reading and writing available in this technology rich world described in Seely Brown’s quote, and though much has changed (technology-wise) in the 7 years since I was in secondary school, there is still a problem with paying mind to student interest. The question for educators turns to how we can take Gil’s turntablism and Tucker’s fascination with Spore and use these discourses as tools to help young minds develop.

It seems that the upcoming election offers some hope, especially with Obama’s stance on education. If we allow a fresh mind like that into the White House, instead of McCain who has no agenda whatsoever for educational reform (as far as I can tell), we may finally be able to develop these discourses in our classrooms when the time comes. Then maybe we can be the Yodas or ethnographers that are so desperately needed.

Here he was acquiring knowledge for use, like learning a language by growing up in its country — an experience quite unlike learning a language in order to pass a test. Those high-tech computerized model cars are so rich in principles of mathematics (and the same goes for other domains of knowledge) that one could well think of the experience of their builders as learning math by living in mathland — a place that is to mathematics as France is to French. And the success of students like Bill in these environments shows that just as all children — and not only those who “have a head for French” — learn French if they live to France, so, too, all children learn mathematics if they meet it in a context that is more alive than the ordinary curriculum.

Computers in the Classroom: Agents of Change By Seymour Papert

The Washington Post Education Review Sunday, October 27, 1996

If your child were to spend some time in France, it is likely he or she will pick up quite a bit of French. “What would happen,” asked Papert, “if children who can’t do math grew up in Mathland, a place that is to math what France is to French?”… A key component of Papert’s educational philosophy is self-directed learning. As kids build cool things in Mathland, they naturally encounter problems which require creative mathematical solutions. As a result, formerly abstract mathematical concepts take on a real meaning, and there are tangible rewards for tinkering with these concepts.

They aren’t. The idea at the beginning is to provide a safe place to engage and to build community around the conversations. As we move through the year, we begin moving the discussions into more public spaces.

This post took me back to early nineties when I was reading papers by Brown, Duguid, Lave and others on Situated Cognition and related thinking.

Could not help but think of a world where education funding supplanted military funding. Teachers, students and parents could be immersed in real situations around the globe. Not virtual but real. That is something to dream about.

Great post. I love the idea of immersion, and the role desire plays (or could play in it) in this kind of connectivity.

Nicole’s comment about teachers acting as ethnographers in the classroom is a great point as well. Ethnographers, of course, talk about being “participant-observers” in the community or society the study. Thinking about being a “participant-observer” in my own classroom is great food for thought not only in reframing or retooling content, but also strategizing more critically about assessment.

I have never really thought of education based on immersion, and i wonder if we can. Don’t we usually have the need for a leader in a situation. I mean i don’t want to discount the idea of true collaboration, i just need to know how to get there. If everybody is in the water, is there a lifeguard? great thought i need to absorb it and try to get toward the technique (is it possible without getting wet?)
Dale

Will wrote:
Or it might be that I still canâ€™t seem to shake this stuckness I still feel with the conversation about social tools and learning in schools.

Will,

I, too, grow tired of the “stuckness” of the conversations about social tools and learning in schools. It’s amazing how slow others are to embrace a change that is literally enveloping everything about the learning lives of our students.

Which is why the “immersion” in tools approach to PD that you are pushing is so important. Maybe—just maybe—teachers who embrace digital tools for their own learning will finally see its value in their classrooms.

I only seek out digital learning opportunities for my students because they have changed who I am as a learner. Once I find a tool that facilitates my own personal and professional growth, I look for ways to incorporate that tool into the learning of my students.

I end up being their digital yoda—showing them how to use the tools they’ve embraced to learn more.